Trajectory of Psychosocial Measures Amongst Informal Caregivers: Case-Controlled Study of 1375 Informal Caregivers from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing

Abstract

Informal caregivers provide vital support for older adults living in the community with chronic illnesses. The purpose of this study was to assess the psychosocial status of informal caregivers of community-dwelling adults over an eight-year period. Informal caregivers of adult care-recipients were identified from Wave 1 of the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA) cohort. Multivariate regression analysis models were constructed to assess the association between participant’s psychosocial characteristics and informal caregiving. Multilevel modelling explored the psychosocial changes between caregivers and non-caregivers over eight years. 1375 informal caregivers and 2750 age-matched non-caregivers were analyzed. Self-reported loneliness (Odd Ratio (OR): 0.26; 95% confidence intervals (CI): 0.01–0.51) and relationship status (OR: 0.36; 95% CI: 0.16–0.46) were independently associated with caregiving. Caregivers were more socially isolated with less holidaying abroad (OR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.35–0.66), attendance to church (OR: 0.30; 95% CI: 0.11–0.49), or charity groups (OR: 0.35; 95% CI: 0.14–0.55). On multilevel analysis, over time (eight-years), caregivers reported greater loneliness (p < 0.01), change in relationship status (p = 0.01) and reduced control, autonomy, and pleasure (p ≤ 0.01) compared to non-caregivers. Given the deleterious effects caregiving can place on health and wellbeing, further interventions are required to improve these psychosocial factors.

Internet-facilitated interventions for informal caregivers of patients with neurodegenerative disorders: Systematic review and meta-analysis

“…feeding, dressing and washing) [8][9][10] escalating caregiver burden. 11,12 ND care-provision is distinctly demanding 13 and is associated with sleep impairment, 14 anxiety, 15,16 stress, 17 depression, 18,19 cognitive decline 20 increased heart-disease risk 21 and exacerbation of pre-existing conditions. 22 Caregivers risk experiencing burnout.…”

Caring for Older People As a Social Determinant of Health: Findings from a Scoping Review of Observational Studies

“…Two studies reported that carers exhibited better memory and verbal fluency compared to non-carers (Garcia-Castro et al, 2022;Yuan & Gruhn 2021). With regards to mental health and loneliness, the impact of caring was inconsistent across studies and varied by carer attributes (Benson et al, 2017;Bom & Stockel, 2021;Chanfreau & Goisis, 2021;Doebler et al, 2017;Gallagher & Wetherell, 2020;Grande et al, 2018;Harris et al, 2020;Hodiamont et al, 2019;Kaschowitz & Brandt, 2017;McGarrigle et al, 2018;McMunn et al, 2009;Moriarty et al, 2015;Rafnsson et al, 2017;Saadi et al, 2021;Shiue, 2017;Sin et al, 2021;Smith et al, 2020;Storey et al, 2019;Vlachantoni et al, 2020). For instance, one study (Mortensen et al, 2019) found that male carers in paid work experienced a more blunted cortisol awakening response than non-carers, an indicator associated with chronic stress; however, female carers in paid work showed a steeper cortisol slope than non-carers, an indicator of healthy cortisol awakening response and thus suggesting a positive effect of caring on stress levels.…”

“…Life satisfaction was lower for female carers but higher for male co-residential carers, compared to non-carers (Della Giusta & Jewell, 2014). Evidence about the association between caring and social participation was inconsistent (Smith et al, 2020).…”

Caregivers of People with Substance use or Mental Health Disorders in the US

“…Caregiving by family members and friends meets recipients’ needs such as safety, food, housing, and treatment engagement 1 . However, caregiving for persons with chronic conditions such as SU/MHD also significantly strains caregivers 2 – 4 . Studies of caregiving for persons with SU/MHD have generally examined caregiving for this type of care recipient in isolation from caregivers of other types, such that it is unclear how caregivers of persons with SU/MHD compare to caregivers of other types.…”

“…1 However, caregiving for persons with chronic conditions such as SU/ MHD also significantly strains caregivers. [2][3][4] Studies of caregiving for persons with SU/MHD have generally examined caregiving for this type of care recipient in isolation from caregivers of other types, such that it is unclear how caregivers of persons with SU/MHD compare to caregivers of other types. The present study fills this gap by using Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) data 5 from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to compare caregivers of persons with SU/MHD to other groups of caregivers on demographic, caregiving, and health status characteristics and to examine potential predictors of poorer health in this subgroup of caregivers.…”